These discussions have been had round and over again.
These units only make sense in (and are tailored for) an educational environment, where a minimal but physical UI is best for first steps and teaching of basic principles.
They are priced (given the supposedly lower volumes) accordingly. Also, these give the option to not update your teaching material (or not much at least)..
Then keep an old CRO around and give maybe one day or two of teaching how it works. Then move on to the 21st century and concentrate on modern DSO's. Even I realize that analog CRO's in today's environment are somewhat obsolete and the chances of running into one in the workplace are slim to none.
Teaching time in education is very limited. Scopes aren't important compared with understanding loop stability, offsets, drift, noise, transmission lines etc.
In an educational situation you should be learning about the characteristics of the circuit or problem that will be true now and in 30 years. You should be learning which classes of tools exist and which not to use. You should not be learning about the characteristics of a particular tool that will be out of date in 3 years.
Consequence: use the tool with the shortest learning curve, and then allow the student to concentrate on the circuit. That usually means the simplest tool.
They will have their entire career ahead of them to learn the differences between various sampling modes, and where those settings are buried on one specific tool that their employer provides for them. As an employer I won't give a damn if they know how to use a Frobnitz123. I will care if they try to use a scope where they should use an LA, or try to measure the impedance of the mains with an avometer.
Besides, using non-ideal equipment is good training for the real world, e.g. what scope do you use when you are developing the worlds fastest scope, or there isn't money for a special purpose tool?